David Roberts lays it out: to avoid severe, irreversible, and overwhelmingly negative impacts "would require a level of immediate, global, coordinated action never before seen in human history."

The most extreme climate “alarmists” in U.S. politics are not nearly alarmed enough. The chances of avoiding catastrophic global temperature rise are not nil, exactly, but they are slim-to-nil,...

Nothing approaching that level of action is on the table, in the U.S. or any other country.

...a carbon tax big enough to generate the reductions these researchers are talking about would be gargantuan, on the order of hundreds of dollars per ton, not to mention the massive tariffs that would have to be levied on carbon-intensive imports. The fact is, achieving these reductions would require rethinking and rebuilding most of the political and economic systems that govern the country. [emphasis mine]

A couple of factors are at play. The US political establishment’s neglect of the issue is a central reason why the mainstream media gets away with ignoring this existential threat.

The media has a hard time wrapping its (herd-like, Borg-like) mind around climate change because climate change is the kind of story that calls into question the foundational assumptions of our economy and society.

The media’s built-in bias for staying close to the center of economic orthodoxy isn’t going to disappear anytime soon. [emphasis mine]

And what we see is the usual: politicians don't want to act on what they must know about climate change; it would need drastic and very impopular measures and that would cost votes! So they ignore the problem and think that the next government should act - but they themselves want to finish their career first...